From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24813 invoked by alias); 12 Aug 2005 01:28:19 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 24789 invoked by uid 22791); 12 Aug 2005 01:28:12 -0000 Received: from centrmmtao05vip.cox.net (HELO centrmmtao05.cox.net) (68.1.16.143) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Fri, 12 Aug 2005 01:28:12 +0000 Received: from white ([68.9.64.121]) by centrmmtao05.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.04.00 201-2131-118-20041027) with ESMTP id <20050812012810.EXNC25146.centrmmtao05.cox.net@white>; Thu, 11 Aug 2005 21:28:10 -0400 Received: from bob by white with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1E3OLC-0002eh-00; Thu, 11 Aug 2005 21:28:10 -0400 Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2005 08:06:00 -0000 From: Bob Rossi To: Jim Ingham Cc: Eli Zaretskii , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: RFC: MI output during program execution Message-ID: <20050812012810.GA10011@white> Mail-Followup-To: Jim Ingham , Eli Zaretskii , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <1123605445.30442.ezmlm@sources.redhat.com> <20050809181311.GB3012@white> <20050809223421.GB3557@white> <20050810004128.GA4264@nevyn.them.org> <20050810004826.GD3557@white> <2040BEEA-4200-4118-91EB-D093ED4D37A1@apple.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2040BEEA-4200-4118-91EB-D093ED4D37A1@apple.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i X-SW-Source: 2005-08/txt/msg00126.txt.bz2 > Remember I haven't done this with observers or events yet. The way I > did it with hooks, the result of the hooks is gathered into the > "^done" or the other termination states for the command. So for > instance, if you run gdb on itself, and do: Hi Jim, Thanks for all the guidence so far. Even though you have not attempted the observer approach, how do you feel about it? Is this something that you think could be accomplished with the current FSF GDB? Nick, Daniel and Eli, do you like this approach? I'm sure I could find some time to get something going in this direction, with a little bit of thought. Anyone else willing to work towards this solution? I really like Daniel's idea of just alerting the user that something has changed, instead of actually giving the user the data. For instance he had, =breakpoint-changed,[bpnum="1",state="disabled"] =thread-changed,[thread="2"] I might even prefer, =breakpoint-changed,thread-changed which would then allow the FE to call -list-breakpoints or whatever if they are interested. This is very similar to how annotate=2 solved the problem for when breakpoints changed. The only wierd issue that happened with this approach is that the data breakpoint-changed was literally outputted thousands and thousands of times in certain circumstances. (compiled program with optimizations). Thanks, Bob Rossi